From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: slurms@gmx•us,
slurms--- via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>,
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Node Speed Test
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:05:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <25607701-D3ED-4D0D-A5B3-C02B727671BF@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <trinity-c97bc41b-a953-4580-b2d2-ebdda9eb96b2-1437661199263@3capp-mailcom-bs02>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 23 July 2015 10:19:59 GMT-04:00, slurms--- via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>This does not support the theory that the network has the available
>bandwidth for increased block sizes, as in its current state 37% of
>nodes would fail to upload a 20MB block to a single peer in under 20
>seconds (referencing a number quoted by Gavin). If the bar for
>suitability is placed at taking only 1% of the block time (6 seconds)
>to upload one block to one peer, then 69% of the network fails for 20MB
>blocks. For comparison, only 10% fail this metric for 1MB blocks.
Note how due to bandwidth being generally asymetric your findings are probably optimistic - you've measured download capacity. On top of that upload is further reduced by the fact that multiple peers at once need to be sent blocks for reliability.
Secondly you're measuring a network that isn't under attack - we need significant additional margin to resist attack as performance is consensus-critical.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQE9BAEBCAAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJVsRCj
AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lnc47AIAIQbznavjd2Rbqxeq5a3GLqeYoI4BZIQYqfWky+6OQtq
yGRKaqPtGuES5y9L0k7efivT385mOl87PWnWMy61xxZ9FJgoS+YHkEx8K4tfgfA2
yLOKzeFSar2ROCcjHYyPWa2XXjRbNmiLzfNuQyIBArg/Ch9//iXUUM+GG0mChF5k
nUxLstXgXDNh5H8xkHeLi4lEbt9HFiwcZnT1Tzeo2dvVTujrtyNb/zEhNZScMXDc
UOlT8rBLxzHlytKdXt1GNKIq0feTRJNbreBh7/EB4nYTT54CItaaVXul0LdHd5/2
kgKtdbUdeyaRUKrKcvxiuIwclyoOuRQp0DZThsB262o=
=tBUM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-23 16:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-23 14:19 slurms
2015-07-23 15:04 ` Gavin Andresen
2015-07-23 15:55 ` Jameson Lopp
2015-07-23 17:14 ` Slurms MacKenzie
2015-07-23 17:41 ` Pindar Wong
2015-07-23 16:05 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2015-07-23 19:56 ` Marcel Jamin
2015-07-23 19:57 ` Joseph Gleason ⑈
2015-07-24 2:55 ` Peter Todd
2015-07-23 16:36 ` Leo Wandersleb
2015-07-23 17:12 ` Slurms MacKenzie
2015-07-24 2:48 ` Matt Corallo
2015-07-24 3:19 ` Slurms MacKenzie
2015-07-24 3:54 ` grarpamp
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=25607701-D3ED-4D0D-A5B3-C02B727671BF@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=slurms@gmx$(echo .)us \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox